Bridgewater Canal

[b0atman]

So first hire boater does the ring Sunny clocks it 2nd hire boater does ring Sunny clocks it as 7/8 days 3rd hire boater gets charged £40 by sunny what happens to 4th 5th 6th hire boaters.

Edited June 22, 2016 by b0atman

[Arthur Marshall]

So first hire boater does the ring Sunny clocks it 2nd hire boater does ring Sunny clocks it as 7/8 days 3rd hire boater gets charged £40 by sunny what happens to 4th 5th 6th hire boaters.

No, because the first boater's left, so they all get charged £40 except the first one. Although if they're all going in the same direction, can it actually qualify as a return?

[Paul C]

 

Presumably it's whatever Claymoore are paying now?

 

Claymoore are based on the Bridgewater. There is a rule that you need a Bridgewater mooring, to obtain a long term Bridgewater licence. So, the nearby hire firms (but on CRT waters) may struggle to obtain this. Its up to Peel really....

 

 

So first hire boater does the ring Sunny clocks it 2nd hire boater does ring Sunny clocks it as 7/8 days 3rd hire boater gets charged £40 by sunny what happens to 4th 5th 6th hire boaters.

 

One of the crucial aspects is, without some kind of physical barrier (ie a barrier with a lock on it, or a padlock on a set of locks) there is no pragmatic way to enforce this. Sooner or later it will come to a head, or resolve itself possibly by the relevant hire firms being able to do a reasonable deal with Peel holdings. Its impossible to predict, though.

[b0atman]

No, because the first boater's left, so they all get charged £40 except the first one. Although if they're all going in the same direction, can it actually qualify as a return?

surely once £40 is paid it is a short term licence for a period of time or is it ?

2nd boat could get there within 7 days depending on rate of travel and stops so boat would be ok .

Edited June 22, 2016 by b0atman

[Horace42]

It's all academic to me. I am not likely to visit the area again, so Peel can charge what they like (I guess they do anyway), but if there is a practical solution - a reciprocal fee for Peel and CRT that is simple, workable, fair and collectable - then what would it be?

 

[b0atman]

What about the gold licence are CRT now going to negotiate £? from each to Peel ?

[Arthur Marshall]

I'd have thought if CRT impose a non-return 7 day limit on the Bridgewater boats, they'd have a lot more to lose as less able to go any distance without buying a CRT licence. Being a bigger area available, logically they should pay a much higher rate than £40 - at least a couple of hundred I'd have thought.

Maybe it's Peel who really want to get rid of boats, not CRT... or maybe it's a ploy to get CRT to take it over.

[ditchcrawler]

I'd have thought if CRT impose a non-return 7 day limit on the Bridgewater boats, they'd have a lot more to lose as less able to go any distance without buying a CRT licence. Being a bigger area available, logically they should pay a much higher rate than £40 - at least a couple of hundred I'd have thought.

Maybe it's Peel who really want to get rid of boats, not CRT... or maybe it's a ploy to get CRT to take it over.

All this would only bother boaters, why should Peel be bothered if people who have bought licences to use their waters can go on CRT waters the same as it makes no difference to them if we can get to Liverpool and back.

[Arthur Marshall]

All this would only bother boaters, why should Peel be bothered if people who have bought licences to use their waters can go on CRT waters the same as it makes no difference to them if we can get to Liverpool and back.

Because if you have to pay a small fortune to get off the Bridgewater, surely it'll make it less attractive to moor on, so fewer boaats will, so less money for licences. I aould imagine not many of CRTers visit Liverpool every year, but most Bridgewater licensees come onto CRT waters. Or maybe they just go up and down their little patch.

Edited badly for spooling. Got new glasses, can't see anythkng...

Edited June 22, 2016 by Arthur Marshall

[ditchcrawler]

 

Edited badly for spooling. Got new glasses, can't see anythkng...

They look the same in your picture. ( I don't pick people up on spilling because I can't spill myself)

[tillergirl]

I'm a bit confused.

I've just transited the Bridgewater (i was on it less than 24hrs) to go to Burscough Heritage Weekend (on CRT waters). Does this now mean that i can't go to Lymm Historic Transport Day (on Bridgewater) next weekend?

It means you need to ring CRT and tell them you already had made transit before this latest development had been published and give them your details as requested. Cant see it would make much difference whether you are going north or south same rules apply.

[StephenA]

CRT on their Facebook page are adamant it is nothing to do with them and they have no information and only Peel Holdings can answer the question.

 

https://www.facebook.com/canalrivertrust/posts/1025873634166220

 

I suspect C&RT have just rolled over and done nothing to represent the boaters who pay their licence fees.

[tillergirl]

But boats from Middlewich would do it more than once in 28 days - I don't think Peel are considering different crews.....

A guy at Middlewich Boats told us this morning ghat it wont affect them......he couldn't explain why

[Cheshire cat]

Maybe Sonny is only tasked with upsetting private boaters.

[StephenA]

No reply from Peel Holdings.... still trying to work out how they are going to collect it from a boat in the middle of nowhere...

[Paul C]

A guy at Middlewich Boats told us this morning ghat it wont affect them......he couldn't explain why

 

 

Maybe Sonny is only tasked with upsetting private boaters.

 

I suspect that's the truth. Peel Holdings aren't looking to penalise hire boaters, just a small percentage of private boaters who (in their opinion) take the piss and abuse the reciprocal agreement, by being on the Bridgewater far more than "normal".

No reply from Peel Holdings.... still trying to work out how they are going to collect it from a boat in the middle of nowhere...

 

I suspect the boats which they don't want are actually pretty easy to target since they barely move. Moving boats which use the Bridgewater twice within the 28 days (probably only a day or two at a time) aren't the ones they're after. Its the ones with "7 days on, 1 hour off" style movements. Thus, the policing of the junctions, tracking of moving boats, etc etc are actually a non-issue in terms of enforcement, even though they are "caught" by the new rule.

[StephenA]

 

 

I suspect that's the truth. Peel Holdings aren't looking to penalise hire boaters, just a small percentage of private boaters who (in their opinion) take the piss and abuse the reciprocal agreement, by being on the Bridgewater far more than "normal".

 

 

Apart from the fact that he seemed to be hassling people from Broken Cross, and apparently overstating the new restrictions

[spadefoot]

I don't reckon that Peel are trying to penalise anyone. I expect they're just trying to raise some money to pay for the wear & tear on their canal, from the people causing that wear & tear.

[David Mack]

Maybe it's Peel who really want to get rid of boats, not CRT... or maybe it's a ploy to get CRT to take it over.

Yes, I wondered that. Make the Bridgewater too expensive for CRT boaters, so that they complain loudly, and pressure is brought to bear on CRT to pick up the responsibility. And Peel, who are a property company, shed one of their non-core businesses.

 

Probably good news for CRT boaters, but the Bridgewater boaters won't like it as they will then have to pay for a full CRT licence.

[AndrewIC]

Probably good news for CRT boaters, but the Bridgewater boaters won't like it as they will then have to pay for a full CRT licence.

But no longer a Bridgewater licence as well?

CRT on their Facebook page are adamant it is nothing to do with them and they have no information and only Peel Holdings can answer the question.

 

https://www.facebook.com/canalrivertrust/posts/1025873634166220

 

I suspect C&RT have just rolled over and done nothing to represent the boaters who pay their licence fees.

So that's "reciprocal" in the sense of "unilateral", then?

[Horace42]

Probably good news for CRT boaters, but the Bridgewater boaters won't like it as they will then have to pay for a full CRT license.

 

Not good news really. If CRT took it over, I think they will use it as an excuse to increase fees across the board for everybody. Bridgewater boaters hit hardest having to pay in full up-front for unrestricted 'free' use of the whole network of CRT canals, and me for the 'free' use of the Bridgewater Many of us never likely to venture any further than we do now.

And then add the network of other waterways if CRT take them over from the Environmental Agency - at even higher fees.

[Richard10002]

For a 45ft narrowboat, at the moment I pay about £1k to Peel which is split into Licence and mooring fee... I also pay a fee to our club for mooring on the club moorings, but this is only about £150, plus a contribution to work parties which I think is valued at about £10 per foot.

 

It appears that I cannot spend more than 3 nights a week on board, and I cant spend more than 24 hours in any one place on the towpath side when travelling.

 

I dont know how much a CRT licence is for a 45ft boat but, assuming I also pay something for the club mooring, I can spend as long as I like on my boat, (presumably as long as I dont live on it on the mooring), up to 14 days in any one place on the towpath side, and would be free to travel the whole network at no extra cost.

 

I think that would probably be a reasonable deal for Bridgewater boaters that actually go boating...

[Arthur Marshall]

For a 40 foot boat on a farm mooring on the Macc, I pay about £1200 a year to CRT for licence and mooring permit, plus a fee to the farmer. At my farm you can't live on, but at the previous ones I moored at you could. So it is more expensive that the Bridgewater, but you do get a lot more for it.